According to a survey by the copyright organization Kopiosto, many creative professionals are already using AI as a tool in their work. At the same time, there is concern in the sector about the unauthorized use of works to train AI systems and about the impact AI may have on future livelihoods.
“Artificial intelligence is reshaping working life in the creative industries significantly and at an unprecedented pace. It is extremely important to listen to how AI affects the livelihoods of those working in the field and what views they have on future developments,” says Valtteri Niiranen, CEO of Kopiosto, in a press release.
Kopiosto asked authors, performing artists, and publishers in the creative field about their experiences and attitudes toward AI. A total of 1,114 people responded to the survey. Of the respondents, 78% were authors or performing artists, 8% represented publishers, and 14% said they worked both as creators and as publisher representatives.
Among the respondents, 38% had a neutral attitude toward AI. Positive and negative views were almost equally common. The most positive attitudes were found in educational publishing, photography, and journalism. The most negative responses came from the fields of translation and visual arts.
AI Enhances Creative Work
Of the author respondents, 57% said they had used AI in their own work. However, of these, the majority—70%—said they had only used it a little. Usage was most common in the press and media sector and in photography. In publishing, nearly half of the respondents said their employer had used or experimented with AI.
At present, AI applications are mainly used for brainstorming, translation, and creating summaries. Respondents could also imagine using AI to streamline their own work, such as automating certain stages, developing ideas, and proofreading text.
More than half of those surveyed believe they will use AI more in the future. The most positive outlooks for AI use in the future were in the audiovisual industry, photography, and in journalism and educational publishing.
Works for AI Use—With Permission and Compensation
Nearly four in ten author respondents said they would be willing to make their works available for AI use, but only in return for compensation and under agreed conditions. Less than a third of respondents, however, said they would not allow their works to be used by AI under any circumstances. Still, only 13% of author respondents have explicitly prohibited the use of their works for AI training or text and data mining. This can be done, for example, by adding a standard to websites or metadata of digital content.
Respondents in journalism and media were the most positive toward granting AI licenses—about half would allow their works to be used under certain conditions. In the visual arts, however, attitudes were more negative: 36% of respondents in that field said they would not allow the use of their works under any conditions.
Clear Rules Are Needed
Almost four in ten respondents consider the risks of AI to be greater than the opportunities it offers. Concerns include the use of works to train AI models without permission or compensation, as well as an increase in plagiarism. The biggest perceived threat is a decline in income over the long term: 54% of author respondents and 48% of publisher respondents believe this will happen.
Respondents were unanimous about the need to safeguard the rights of the creative sector in the AI era. Nearly all (nine out of ten) said that companies developing AI should be more transparent about what materials they use to train their systems. In addition, 86% of respondents want policymakers to address the challenges of AI, and 85% believe that AI technologies using copyright-protected content should pay compensation to rights holders.